Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport - Page 169

esquire · #**3361** Posted **May 26, 2016, 9:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I know what you mean. Often the Chicago flight is around $700. You can usually find a connection from there to LHR for a mere $200 more. It's mind boggling.

It really is. That's what lack of competition does, I suppose.

I've flown through MSP and ORD many times but I have never actually flown TO either of those cities (although I did have an unexpected 2 night stop at ORD en route to NYC due to an east coast snowstorm a few years ago)... the one time I went to Chicago for a vacation, I just drove there.

jmt18325 · #**3362** Posted **May 26, 2016, 9:27 PM**

The price of flying there is what has kept me from going to Chicago.

kattiff · #**3363** Posted **May 27, 2016, 11:38 AM**

Hello everyone,
So yesterday Air Canada had a 767 diversion in the morning. No idea what or where it was going to and from.
But the main topic...
Porter started their trial flights. I got my friend to ask. Apparently the inbound fr Toronto was full, the out bound was half full and the out and in from Ottawa was full. So that's pretty good for the first run!

CoryB · #**3364** Posted **May 27, 2016, 3:28 PM**

^^ The passenger counts are the Porter flights are completely irrelevant to the possibility of service to YWG. The flights were larger unadvertised as they are more an open charter for the Liberal national convention this weekend than a test of scheduled service. What is going to mater to Porter is more how the operational side of YWG functions on their flights and unless you a deep airport insider you are unlikely to have information to share on that.

esquire · #**3365** Posted **May 27, 2016, 3:51 PM**

I checked flightaware on that 767 diversion, looks like it was a YYZ-YVR run that stopped here for about an hour. Guessing it was likely medical?

RepomanYWG · #**3366** Posted **May 27, 2016, 5:55 PM**

One note about those Porter flights is they are capped at 50 passengers due to weight and range of the Q400s so when they say full, it's 50 pax. They do this practice on their Orlando route as well. Time will tell but they have pretty much everything ready to go if they do want to make it a more permanent offering.

CoryB · #**3367** Posted **May 27, 2016, 7:24 PM**

^^ Porter reducing the available seat count and running the Q400 close to its legally allowable range (aka burning lots of fuel) to reach YWG would likely mean they would need a fairly high load factor for scheduled service to make financial sense.

GarryEllice · #**3368** Posted **May 27, 2016, 10:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

^^ Porter reducing the available seat count and running the Q400 close to its legally allowable range (aka burning lots of fuel) to reach YWG would likely mean they would need a fairly high load factor for scheduled service to make financial sense.

Is stopping in Thunder Bay not an option?

RepomanYWG · #**3369** Posted **May 28, 2016, 4:59 PM**

It's always an option. They already do fly to Thunder Bay. I think people looking to fly to Toronto would not be willing to stop at YQT with all the other direct flights we have available to us.

Bombardier's marketing folks claim that the Q400 still turns a profit when only 1/3 full so I don't think limiting pax to 50 is that big a deal.

esquire · #**3370** Posted **May 28, 2016, 7:44 PM**

^ No one would take Porter to Toronto via Thunder Bay if a Westjet or Air Canada flight could be had at the same price and took, say, 90 minutes less.

GarryEllice · #**3371** Posted **May 29, 2016, 12:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ No one would take Porter to Toronto via Thunder Bay if a Westjet or Air Canada flight could be had at the same price and took, say, 90 minutes less.

But if it was cheaper? Porter flies quite a few people from Toronto to St. John's, stopping at both Ottawa and Halifax. Price trumps time. If it works there I don't see why it wouldn't work here -- Winnipeggers are even cheaper than Newfoundlanders!

biguc · #**3372** Posted **May 29, 2016, 12:12 AM**

And to fly into Billy Bishop?

esquire · #**3373** Posted **May 29, 2016, 1:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

But if it was cheaper? Porter flies quite a few people from Toronto to St. John's, stopping at both Ottawa and Halifax. Price trumps time. If it works there I don't see why it wouldn't work here -- Winnipeggers are even cheaper than Newfoundlanders!

If the whole point of stopping at Thunder Bay is to provide full capacity on a flight to Winnipeg, then isn't that defeated if Porter has to undercut AC/WS to get anyone to fly with them given that they'd take a lot longer to get there?

Might as well just fly to Winnipeg with the plane 1/3 empty, charge full price and call it a day.

casper · #**3374** Posted **May 29, 2016, 5:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

If the whole point of stopping at Thunder Bay is to provide full capacity on a flight to Winnipeg, then isn't that defeated if Porter has to undercut AC/WS to get anyone to fly with them given that they'd take a lot longer to get there?

Might as well just fly to Winnipeg with the plane 1/3 empty, charge full price and call it a day.

You would assume there is some demand between Winnipeg and Thunder Bay. Given Air Canada Express, WestJet Encore and Bearskin operates the route that is probably a good indication. Demand to warrant a fourth airline on the route? I don't know? From their the could offer Montreal and Toronto as a connection.

Flying a load restricted Q400 from Winnipeg to Toronto is silly when the competition is operating 737 and A320 or E90 aircraft.

The only reason I can see for such a flight is Porter sees a business case to operate between Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Regina, Calgary and Edmonton. If so then it needs a way of cycling aircraft between its western and central Canada operations. However I don't think they have given any indication that such a move is on their radar screen.

Pinus · #**3375** Posted **May 29, 2016, 6:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

But if it was cheaper? Porter flies quite a few people from Toronto to St. John's, stopping at both Ottawa and Halifax. Price trumps time. If it works there I don't see why it wouldn't work here -- Winnipeggers are even cheaper than Newfoundlanders!

Sigh. Winnipeggers are no more or less "cheap" than any other citizen of any other city or province. As a Winnipegger, I don't appreciate being labelledi as such as I don't consider myself "cheap" by any means, nor am I "rich" by any means either. Yet another self-loathing dated stereotype. The joke is old, folks. Time to move on.

esquire · #**3376** Posted **May 29, 2016, 3:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper

Flying a load restricted Q400 from Winnipeg to Toronto is silly when the competition is operating 737 and A320 or E90 aircraft.

I guess that's really the bottom line here... it's one bad choice (load restriction) vs another (stopping in Thunder Bay) which would make it very hard for Porter to effectively compete against WestJet or Air Canada on the Winnipeg-Toronto route.

drew · #**3377** Posted **May 29, 2016, 3:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

I guess that's really the bottom line here... it's one bad choice (load restriction) vs another (stopping in Thunder Bay) which would make it very hard for Porter to effectively compete against WestJet or Air Canada on the Winnipeg-Toronto route.

I am not sure it's a direct competition.

People flying Porter aren't doing so for flight connections, and would be flying into downtown for convenience. I would imagine there is a market for that PROVIDED a flight schedule makes sense.

casper · #**3378** Posted **May 29, 2016, 8:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

I am not sure it's a direct competition.

People flying Porter aren't doing so for flight connections, and would be flying into downtown for convenience. I would imagine there is a market for that PROVIDED a flight schedule makes sense.

Pearson to downtown by train is $12 and with a travel time of 25 minutes and a wait time of 15 minutes.

If Porter operates with a stop in Thurder Bay or Dryden or somewhere else it will easily add an extra 40 minutes basically cancelling out the time savings. They will probably sell seats but it is going to be to be to someone who is the Porter loyalty program and finds that important; does not care that much about a few extra minutes or is sensitive to price and they happen to be cheaper on that specific flight.

Andy6 · #**3379** Posted **May 29, 2016, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

I am not sure it's a direct competition.

People flying Porter aren't doing so for flight connections, and would be flying into downtown for convenience. I would imagine there is a market for that PROVIDED a flight schedule makes sense.

The convenience argument is a lot less compelling now that we have UP Express.

MalcolmTucker · #**3380** Posted **May 30, 2016, 1:16 AM**

There was also a Porter Winnipeg-Ottawa flight today as enough Ottawans had booked the Porter flight through Toronto that they just rejigged it and gave the option of a direct. When operating from a long enough runway there is likely no weight restriction on that route. Porter has enough brand loyalty - if you don't fly enough to get status on Air Canada, but your work lets you book Porter, Porter is pretty awesome compared to Zone 4 Air Canada.

Also, went through the airport! Very nice.